Racial Profiling
of Shoplifter by Store Does Not Violate Civil Rights Statute

Description

Appeals court affirmed dismissal
of suit by an African-American store customer who was arrested for shoplifting.
Even if the reason store employees watched him with particular care was
because of his race, it did not create a cause of action for violation of
his civil rights for him.

Topic

Torts

Key Words

False Imprisonment; Malicious Prosecution; Civil Rights; Shoplifting

C A S E
S U M M A R Y

Facts

Youngblood, an African-American, was at a Hy-Vee
food store when he was observed by an employee who thought he was spending
a long time at a selection of beef jerky, that his behavior was suspicious,
and that he had his hands under his shirt several times. Youngblood bought
a small amount of jerky. As he headed for the exit, a Hy-Vee employee stopped
him and asked to see what he had. His bag was now filled with much more
jerky than he had paid for. Youngblood waited about twenty minutes for the
police, who had been called immediately, to arrive. The officer arrested
Youngblood, but the charges were later dismissed. Youngblood sued for false
arrest, malicious prosecution, and violation of his civil rights. The trial
court dismissed the suit; Youngblood appealed.

Decision

Affirmed. Youngblood's civil rights were not violated; the store had
the right to retrieve its merchandise from him. His arrest by the police
did not make the store a "state actor" subject to liability for discrimination
in prosecution, even if store employees suspected him of shoplifting on
the basis of his race. The store had the right to invoke state legal procedures,
whether those procedures resulted in conviction or not. The store had
probable cause to suspect Youngblood of shoplifting, so it is not liable
to him for false imprisonment or malicious prosecution, even if the criminal
charges were later dismissed.